SUPREME COURT.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXVII, Issue 2499, 12 May 1909, Page 3

SUPREME COURT.

THE POST OFFICE ROBBERY. '

[Per Press Association.]

WELLINGTON, May 11. At the Supreme Court to-day, three men, William Thomas, John Trainer, and George Williams,, were charged ■ with assaulting and robbing James Carter of 6s. They wore found guilty of assaulting with intent to rob. Sentence was postponed till to-morrow. Alfred Burnside, alias Janies Pearce, was convicted of breaking into the Ngaliuahui railway station and stealing clotjhing- He was remanded for sentence. Michael, Hej'hily. charged with stealing watches, chain, and medal from John Rickman, in a Wellington street, was found guilty, with a, recommendation to mercy. He was sentenced to two months’ hard labor. James Hemmingway. whose burglaries have occupied much attention here iatelv, was sentenced to three years’ imprisonment. The judge stated that the sentence would have been heavier but for his youth, prisoner being only 21. Accused’s mother gave evidence that she destroyed all the stamps stolen from the Government Printing Office. THE WESTPORT MURDER CASE. CHRISTCHURCH, May 11. . At tlie opening- of the criminal sessions of the Supreme Court Mr Justice Denniston commented on the large' number of eases, but considered the district could be complimented on the absence of serious-crime. He was glad to notice, a considerable dimunition in sexual crimes in this and other districts '* Referring to tlie charge, of murder against Win. Connelly, liis Honor said it arose out of tlie Westport murder case, a case with which the Grand Jury were no doubt acquainted. Undoubtedly the man had been done to death, and they were aware, or most of them were aware, that two men bad been tried in Nelson on a charge of murder and that the evidence given was te a large extent that of the man Connelly. Two men had been convicted of manslaughter. Subsequently Connolly was charged in Westport and tried in Hokitika for perjury for having falsely given evidence that incriminated the two men. The jury had convicted Connolly, who had afterwards made a statement in which lie practically admitted that his story was false, and that he (Connelly) alone was was present and did the man to death. In these circumstances, although the tlie case presented many matters of interest and importance which required to be tried before a jury, it was unnecessary for the Grand Jury to trouble themselves with the details of tlie case. It was- sufficient for them that Connel.y admitted that lie was .present and was taking a slight part in the transactions. Tliat alone would justify them m putting Connelly on his trial for manslaughter, when, in addition, tlie> had his statement'maclo after Ins trial for perjury, in which, he <icinirbtou. ■tuau he was alone there. In his Honor s opinion that was sufficient ground toi them .to find a true bdl oil the cliarg--of murder. When a man was lollw in the circumstances that the man ni this case was killed, and when the.e was no suggestion of-/accident, it 4a.. upon accused to satisfy the jury • the crime committed was less than murder His Honor wished them to understand that his remarks only applied to the Grand Jury finding a prima mere case. Accused’s, admissions weie no proof of his guilt; 'he might have an explanation of the matter. Neither the finding of a true bill nor the remaiks made by his Honor would preclude the Court dr jury finding that accused s statements, in the matter; were untrue. His Honor’s remarks were lhtended, he added, to justify the Grand Jury to find a true bill without going into tlie whole case, which was very complicated and very elaborate. So lon„ as the Grand Jury were satisfied, after examining one or two witnesses, tha there was a prima facie case, they clici not need to go into all the details. Christopher Isaac Denby, stationmaster at Leeston, was charged with tlie tlieft of a lady’s dress and other material sent as a parcel by rail. Tor the defence it was maintained tnat not at any time had there been any fraudulent intention on the part of the accused, 'but only a grave error of judgment., His Honor said that accused distiiictlv admitted what the law called a theft, and the defence _ was almost an insult to ail intelligent jury. The jury found Denby guilty, and strongly recommended him to mercy. The prisoner’s counsel, Mr. Donnelly, applied for probation -and, referring to tlie report of the probation officer, said that there was a statement therein contained that there hmi been other shortages at Leeston, which liad stopped when the accused had left was, according to tlie' accused, not correct. He desired Mr. Gray, Traffic Manager, to be called to- refute the statement. ITis Honor directed that the matter should be inquired into. •Lucy Riley, on a charge'of perjury, in having stated, in the Magistrate s Court tliatea certain man was the father of her child, was found not = 'Alexander Kiddey, charged with the killing of Edward Thomas. Saunders, by striking him on the head with liis fist at Sumner on January 20th, was found guilty, and recommended to mercy. A fscntcnco of six moirblis J imp risonmo nt* was passsed.. v